Talk:Poland: Thousands of far-right nationalists gather in Warsaw to march for white supremacy, anti-liberalism, and anti-Islam on Polish independence day

Contents

The title is a placeholder; anyone may change it. I'm going to let this sit for a bit because I've got stuff to do and my Internet is working very slow. If anyone wants to polish the Polish and hit review that's fine with me. What I'd really like is to include a quote from Pope Francis commenting on the march, considering all this citing of Catholicism. Darkfrog24 (talk) 04:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Say something unique. How many people? What was the reason? What was the objective? Something?223.237.238.35 (talk) 22:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

If you are AcagastyaIt looks from the edit history that you are Acagastya. Please respect my wishes and leave me as a person alone for a few weeks. Talk about the article if you must but don't talk about me. Don't tell me to make changes for you; make them yourself or leave them unmade. If you are not Acagastya, then say "I am not Acagastya."

Regardless of who you are, go ahead and write whatever title you see fit. I believe the title is good enough right now, but it's not shining-great, and I welcome anyone who wants to improve it. Darkfrog24 (talk) 05:20, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: I want the user who wrote it in the first place (in this case, you) to make those edits so that you would keep that it in mind for the next time.

Make them unique and specific — Due to the way the software of Wikinews works, each headline must be unique; choose specific details which describe this unique news event.

Tell the most important and unique thing — Article titles should consist of a descriptive, enduring headline. As a series of stories on a topic develop, each headline should convey the most important and unique thing about the story at that time.For example, "Los Angeles bank robbed" is an unenduring headline because there will likely be another bank robbery in Los Angeles at some point. Instead, find the unique angle about the story you are writing and mention that: "Thieves commit largest bank robbery in Los Angeles history", or "Trio robs Los Angeles bank, escapes on motorcycles", or even "Trio commits largest bank robbery in Los Angeles history, flees on motorcycles".

This is not the first time nationalist group marched in Warsaw. This might not be the last. There is something about this event which separates it from other marches. Just like how Women's March becomes largest protest in U.S. history mentioned what was the unique thing. Or, I can think of an example. Um, how about "tourists spot a polar bear near arctic circle". It speaks nothing special, because polar bears are found in that place. Or like how people can march in a democracy. But if you say "tourists spot a rainbow-coloured polar bear near arctic circle", that's something unique. Like how pro-christianity/anti-immigrant, muslim march was.•–• 13:30, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Stop making posts like this to me for a while. Stop making requests like this to me for a while. Either change the title yourself or leave it unchanged, but leave me alone. You've been a jerk and I'm angry at you and I need to figure out how to talk to you so that our conversations actually get somewhere. We both need to let our palates clear. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:24, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Whether or not you are capable of/willing to respect my wishes about this is going to affect how I go about interacting with you in the future. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I don’t know why this troubles you. I can do “not posting things on your talk”, but I would always point out the problems of the article. You asked to leave information on talk page. I did. I stayed to the point, and tried to explain you how this one is just not correct. I didn’t “target” you either. But if this also troubles you, I am sorry, this jerk doesn’t know what would not offend you. (How about you giving me a template, telling me how you wish to receive a message about what is wrong in an article, and how can you correct it? Or, if you don’t like anyone telling what the problem is, with the articles, and you don’t like knowing the mistake you have made, just say it explicitly.•–• 16:29, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

You left information on the talk page, but not for just anyone who might happen to be here. You addressed it to me specifically. You even pinged me.

I pinged you after you responded. I did not, when I asked to mention something unique.•–• 17:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

how you wish to receive a message about what is wrong in an article From you, not at all, for let's say six weeks. Do not address posts about what you think is wrong with the article to me. Don't tell me to do things to the article. If you think they're necessary, do them yourself. Keep it to yourself for a while. It is not "not anyone." It is you specifically.

Sorry, that is not going to happen. You can ignore the messages. But certain things has to be on the talk page, for other reviewer/editor to know. And as you had mentioned, I should not call you from 1.7km to pick up the litter which is next to me -- well, someone else will. I would not. Because if we keep doing it, others (not only you, others) would not learn.•–• 17:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Then post to the talk page saying "I think the title should be more specific" but don't address the post to me or mention me in any way, not as Darkfrog24, not as "the person who drafted this article," not at all. Leave me as a person out of it. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I pinged you after you responded because that message was for you. Before that, when I said to speak something unique, I did not address you.•–• 17:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah but my response was "please leave me alone."

Or you could always just not work on articles that I've drafted. I quit trying to edit your articles a few weeks ago for reasons I've already told you about. It's not that hard. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry. No can do. You may be the author, but if it has some serious problems, Wikinews suffers a loss -- probably more than what the author has to. I really have more important things to do on-wiki than to discuss about article rename. But if you can not understand the problem even after I quoted the policy, I leave it for another reviewer. Maybe you would listen to them.•–• 17:59, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Acagastya, Why are you ordering people around? You seem intent on making everyone at wikinews miserable. Is that your intent? Ottawahitech (talk) 01:01, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

It's okay, Ottawahitech. Acagastya and I are both adults and we will work this out. I just need a little space to think and I believe Acagastya could benefit from that as well. I'm sure Acagastya will discuss his beliefs and motives with you if you ask on his user talk page. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:36, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: There is no AGF on this project, so it is okay if they want to say this, I think I should answer them. @Ottawahitech: Why am I ordering people around? Well, I, and generally anyone would help a newbie, fix styling, markup, tone, neutrality...anything, even if we have to write it from scratch. When I joined Wikinews, Bddpaux helped me for my first article (first published article). I do it for others. It is okay to help a newbie, but it is not good to do their work always. You know, I could just stop wikilinking things in an article and say "I don't have time", or "I can't edit for some time" or anything. Editors would do it for me, sometimes, but it was my work. And I should be doing this. There were a couple of times when I was at home, and I could not link keywords on time and I had to sleep, and I submit it for review and message Pi zero that I would not be able to link it since my dad asked me to sleep. But I can not ask anyone to do my work. Another thing is, when we fix everything for a newbie, it is possible they take things for granted. On the other hand, if we ask them to make a particular edit, it is possible that they will remember it, and improve it. In this case, this was not the first time a Polish group marched in Warsaw, and the headline should say something unique. That is why I just left a note it should say something that makes it different from other marches. One can always say, "This is a wiki, people work together". But it is not good to halfheartedly contribute to a project. I am not saying Darkfrog24 is not interested in editing Wikinews -- they are close to get a 100 articles published, that is a very impressive number. But, don't forget that this "wiki" is a "news" site, and things are need to be done quick, and it should be in that state for a long time. It would hardly take me a minute to rename this page. But, if I am unable to explain why this page should be renamed, it is possible Darkfrog24, or anyone whose article I am editing might not learn from it. Ottawahitech, 30 months ago, when I was new to Wikinews, other editors helped me, but they ensured that I do my own work, learn from my mistakes, and improve. I have these numbers now, because I learnt when they pointed out the problems. There were times when I could not fix things, but I know, the more we do things, the more we tend to learn. Lesser involvement results in the opposite of it.•–• 14:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Almost forgot to mention: I was reviewing an article, and I had to go for bank, it was ten minute work. On my way home, I met with an accident, and it took me hours to finish the work. I had asked numbermaniac to write that article, and they stayed up late so that there could be one more article on Wikinews. What I am saying is, we might take things casually, but because of that, the article has to suffer.•–• 14:32, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I thought acagastya's initial message was quite respectful, especially compared to previous similar messages. I understand that there is history here and that any message by acagastya asking/suggesting Darkfrog24 make changes is going to be poorly received by Darkfrog24 because xe is sensitized to acagastya's criticism. I don't know that asking one to stay away from the other is going to work all that well as this is a small community.

Also, the unique thing about this event was that, for the first time, the march drew more participants than the official Independence Day events. I'm not sure of the best headline encompassing this though. Ca2james (talk) 04:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

... And after reading the article I see that this unique thing isn't included in the article. The article is verging on stale so I don't think it's useful for me to make changes to it. Ca2james (talk) 04:44, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh yes, it's not as bad as the other posts, but I need to let my tolerance aquifer recharge. That'll take some time. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Quoting a competing news org's journalist is not okay until and unless the story is about that journalist.

Due to that, pyramid was messed up. But even if that quote was there, the article did not mention more important things in the upper half. Like when was the march, how many attended it...Since the information about the number of participants was clubbed with the other march, I did not bring it up, before mentioning what happened in the march.

There was peripheral information, but the article lacked in-depth information. There was a lot that could have been added, but wasn't.

Spell out small numbers.

Some lines were too close to source(s).

Note that Polish alphabet has character like 'ł'. Even if not provided in the sources, try to find and use the actual spelling.

Were a couple of instances where a link to wiktonary could be made. At times, it is a better option that Wikipedia.

Italicise the org names. I am not sure about this, but I think it should be italicised.

Quoting some Polish language quotes would have been a nice idea.

Prefer mentioning UTC over GMT.

It looks like this march happens every year since 2009. "Polish nationalist groups march on Warsaw" was not at all unique. There should have been something unique thing mentioned in the headline. The older one was generic. Every news article has something special, so that should be there in the headline.

Last, but most important thing: I would really appreciate if you keep the problems you have with me, aside, and think of the greater good for the project. That revert on the talk, just made the things more complicated for an article which did not penetrate deep into what had happened.

Quoting a competing news org's journalist is not okay until and unless the story is about that journalist.

Due to that, pyramid was messed up. But even if that quote was there, the article did not mention more important things in the upper half. Like when was the march, how many attended it...Since the information about the number of participants was clubbed with the other march, I did not bring it up, before mentioning what happened in the march.

There was peripheral information, but the article lacked in-depth information. There was a lot that could have been added, but wasn't.

Spell out small numbers.

Some lines were too close to source(s).

Note that Polish alphabet has character like 'ł'. Even if not provided in the sources, try to find and use the actual spelling.

Were a couple of instances where a link to wiktonary could be made. At times, it is a better option that Wikipedia.

Italicise the org names. I am not sure about this, but I think it should be italicised.

Quoting some Polish language quotes would have been a nice idea.

Prefer mentioning UTC over GMT.

It looks like this march happens every year since 2009. "Polish nationalist groups march on Warsaw" was not at all unique. There should have been something unique thing mentioned in the headline. The older one was generic. Every news article has something special, so that should be there in the headline.

Last, but most important thing: I would really appreciate if you keep the problems you have with me, aside, and think of the greater good for the project. That revert on the talk, just made the things more complicated for an article which did not penetrate deep into what had happened.

@Acagastya: Just a thought for the future: the headline ended up longer than preferred. Simple things that could be done to tighten it up just a bit include replacing "gather in Warsaw to march" with "march in Warsaw", and leaving out the "and" before "anti-Islam" (common headlinese); those alone would reduce it from

Poland: Thousands of far-right nationalists gather in Warsaw to march for white supremacy, anti-liberalism, and anti-Islam on Polish independence day

to

Poland: Thousands of far-right nationalists march in Warsaw for white supremacy, anti-liberalism, anti-Islam on Polish independence day

which is at least a start. I'd have been tempted to leave out the list, leaving

Poland: Thousands of far-right nationalists march in Warsaw on Polish independence day

I was too sleepy to make that call, and that is why I asked you if the current title was okay. I had never reviewed an article this late. So I think I did not do a good job. I hope I don't forget it.•–• 17:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: Though not strictly enforced these days, but we do not allow paywalled sources. In this case, Irish Independent. I was surprised when Pi zero allowed your article with The New York Times source, since they had asked me not to use that as they were paywalled. Even if it might be easy to bypass, it is better to avoid paywalled websites.•–• 16:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

The article I used is not paywalled. I don't like it when you make assumptions about what I do and don't know like this, and I am not up for tolerating it right now. I have repeatedly told you to leave me alone for a while. When you ping me, I feel like you are making excuses to flaunt your disregard of my wishes. When the thing you are complaining about literally did not happen I have to at least entertain the idea that you might be making up things to complain about. At the absolute least, you didn't check. Respect my wishes and leave me alone until my well of patience recharges. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

I fail to see how this has anything to do with "the assumption". I was the one who reviewed the article. If the content was blocked then, I would have not-ready'd then. How about you stop making assumptions. There is a serious issue with paywalled sources, and I faced it last night, and that is why I have told you. Let's get real, the number of times I have pinged you in the last ten days is four. One for your talk page message, one for this message, one for the problem with article's headline, and one when you asked Ottawahitech not to say something, even when there is no AGF on the project. None of which would be a deliberate act like the way you say it is. If you can not understand the seriousness of the problem with the headline, or the issue with paywall source, you have not understood most of the basic things of the project -- and this is not an assumption. This can not be false, because if it were, you would do something so this does not happen again.•–• 00:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, I can not access the source right now, at least not until I do not use a VPN.•–• 00:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I can access the source but only if I answer a survey first. I don't know if that counts as paywalled. Ca2james (talk) 00:23, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

With an ad-blocker, the article loads directly. When I turned the ad-blocker off, I got a survey as Ca2james said, but note that you can press "Skip survey" at the bottom to get the article. -- numbermaniac 00:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

This conversation has been marked for the community's attention.
Please remove the {{flag}} when the discussion is complete or no longer important.

A concern was raised on the opinions page that this article might give a misleading impression. I'm noting this here with a flag so we don't forget to revisit the question (since I've been running short of time to do so for some days now). --Pi zero (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Though there are conflicting reports about the entire event tone (i.e. [1]) I have trouble concurring with the opinion that this is fake or misleading news. I expect the figures about the march size are correct though particularly as they were confirmed to an extent by local police. Perhaps the "thousands of" is vague and being vague may make an impression of bias in the first paragraph but this is a fact which is clarified down the story anyway...? It could be interesting to know what Polish Wikinews (or anyone Polish) can find about this, as they have access to local sources. --Gryllida (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

@Gryllida: The main concern here I understand it (though the term "fake news" has been so overused it's losing its original meaning [2]) is that the event is annual so that we are inaccurate when we apparently say in the lede that it was organized by far-right groups. --Pi zero (talk) 01:15, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

If one is to believe the sources, this particular march was organized by far-right groups with a specific nationalist slogan and theme for it. That's stated in the sources very clearly. I'd like to check this in other sources, perhaps with the help of a Polish speaker. --Gryllida (talk) 03:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)